<p>^Which statistics have you seen on 2400 acceptance rates (or similar)? If they pertain to this discussion, I’m sure they would help illuminate it.</p>
<p>I have not seen any statistics for 2400’s in particular. Here is the most relevant data that I know of, though:</p>
<p>Dartmouth</p>
<p>Acceptance rates for those with 800 on…</p>
<p>Critical Reading: 38.6%</p>
<p>Math: 25.3%</p>
<p>Writing: 37.3%</p>
<p>Brown</p>
<p>Acceptance rates for those with 800 on…</p>
<p>Critical Reading: 23%</p>
<p>Math: 20.4%</p>
<p>Writing: 24.3%</p>
<p>The 2400 admit rate is likely deflated by the fact that Asians are surely disproportionately represented among that group, and they tend to face relatively difficult admissions. Nonetheless, it seems reasonable to estimate based on these numbers that at Dartmouth the admit rate for 2400ers is somewhere slightly north of 50% and slightly south of 50% at Brown.</p>
<p>Even those estimates may be a little conservative, given how few people who score 800 on one section score 800 on one of the others, let alone both. Over 10,000 people score 800 on Math and nearly 9,000 on Critical Reading, yet fewer than 1,200 achieve both of those things. The number drops below 300 when we disregard the people who did not score 800 on Writing.</p>
<p>Hm, interesting. I wonder how different it would be for the particular schools in question here. Perhaps a bit lower, but not likely by much. Admission at top schools isn’t just a numbers game, so I’d stick with what I said before. 2400 scores are pretty much always caused by hard work, which will usually be reflected in other areas, which increases chances. So it may not be exactly the 2400 that does it, but I’m sure that’s a fairly significant part.</p>
<p>^I thought it was ~350 per year?
Also, any idea on how many achieve 800’s on both M and W? I couldn’t find any statistics.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>297 last year and 294 the year before that.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I don’t believe that the College Board has released this.</p>
<p>Correlation doesn’t imply causation guys. A 2400 won’t get you in without the GPA/ec’s/essays/recs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t believe that anyone has committed this fallacy. In fact, BillyMc has repeatedly brought up the potential for confounding variables.</p>
<p>^Right, I’m pretty sure I (and others) have supported exactly the opposite (without implying that others haven’t)</p>
<p>^ And yet most people will just take out the fact that 2400 = 50% rate. It’s important to restate that this isn’t the case IMO, because others have often disregarded that in similar threads.</p>
<p>
I had a statistics professor who loved to say this.</p>
<p>pioneeringJones, your post leads to some pornographic pictures(Yippie i did not even notice it at first!). Is this not a violation of the rules? LOL</p>
<p>^I was thinking the same. Some of the ads on that site are likely malware infested as well.</p>
<p>We attended a Stanford info session in June and were told that they accepted only 25% of the applicants with a perfect SAT score of 2400 this past year. I think 300 total 2400ers sounds low per class and I have ZERO basis for even making this statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It was 297 last year; I’m positive. You can check the College Board’s Web site if you want.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is implausibly low.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What are we, twelve?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then don’t click them.</p>
<p>Silverturtle wanted to know what inb4 meant, so I linked him over to Encyclopedia Dramatica and Urban Dictionary for clarification. I pray neither of you stumble upon the darker side of the interwebs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You never were one to trust the adcoms, were you? I know, your observation of reliable data and extensive research lead you to believe that the adcoms are mistaken in their claims.</p>
<p>Well after reading all this… I wish I had a 2400… LOL</p>
<p>
Lol, I was just warning future viewers who click on your rather shady links. Chill.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, it’s too late for them ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I generally trust them about the process for subjective evaluation, but not on numbers-related things; I have data to turn to for that.</p>